Search FYI

NSF Deputy Director Expresses Caution Over Future Budgets

Share This

Publication date:

8 March 1995

Number:

36

"Scary" and "exciting" were two words that NSF Deputy Director AnneC. Petersen used during a February 16 media discussion revolvingaround NSF's future budgets. Peterson is the National ScienceFoundation's Chief Operating Officer, a position which she has heldsince July 1994.

Petersen's comments reflect the anxiety many in Washington arefeeling as Congress starts work on the administration's over-allbudget request. Both the House and Senate appropriationssubcommittees with jurisdiction over the foundation's budget holdhearings on the FY 1996 NSF request during the next few days.

Petersen acknowledges, as does her boss, Director Neal Lane, thatthese are "tight times." She stresses the importance of NSFfunding being seen as an investment in the future, citing economicstudies showing a return between 20-50% on general researchfunding. Federal spending for science and technology has given thecountry a "tremendous boost" she said. This investment message isaimed not only at Congress, but also the research community. "Thisis taxpayer money," Petersen declared, with NSF-sponsored researchbeing for the "good of the country," and not as an entitlement forresearchers.

"The budget realities are very scary," Petersen said, when askedabout NSF's likely future funding profile, saying that a balancedbudget accompanied by tax cuts "will have a devastating impact" onover-all discretionary spending. When asked about the foundation'sresponse to flat or lower future budgets, Petersen spoke of the"need to protect investment in the conduct of research," which isthe traditional role of NSF. She noted that the foundation'ssupport for education has evolved over time, saying that NSF's rolecould be debated. On the matter of the agency's funding ofacademic infrastructure, Petersen acknowledged that it "is a toughone for us" to decide about, citing the rescission of the FY 1995modernization funding. Determining where future cuts should bemade will be difficult, Petersen saying that the National ScienceBoard is not "of one mind." While there have been discussionsabout NSF's priorities, no decisions have been made. Petersen doesnot foresee the NSF reorganizing along the lines of the NationalInstitutes of Health.

Petersen acknowledges that "we have a name recognition problem,"which is all the more acute because of the large number of firstand second term representatives. Concluding her remarks, she saidthere is a need for the research community to more actively promotethe importance of NSF-sponsored research, supported by specificexamples of how "this is an investment that pays off."

The American Institute of Physics, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit corporation, advances, promotes and serves the physical sciences for the benefit of humanity.

We are committed to the preservation of physics for future generations, the success of physics students both in the classroom and professionally, and the promotion of a more scientifically literate society.